Hill v. Snyder
U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of Michigan ordered state to create an administrative structure for the purpose of processing and determining the appropriateness of parole for juvenile offenders serving life-without-parole sentences and set forth certain required procedures.
Legislative Responses Nationwide to Miller
This memo details state legislation enacted following the U.S. Supreme Court’s decision in Miller v. Alabama. Loading... Taking too long? Reload document | Open in new...State Responses to Graham v. Florida and Miller v. Alabama
This memo describes the responses by state legislatures and courts to the U.S. Supreme Court’s decisions in Graham v. Florida and Miller v. Alabama. Loading... Taking too long? Reload document | Open in new...North Dakota
N.D. H.B. 1195, 65th Leg. Assemb. (N.D. 2017) (amending N.D. Cent. Code § 12.1-20-03 and enacting a new section in ch. 12.1-32). North Dakota eliminated life without parole for juveniles in 2017. Under the legislation, defendants convicted as adults for offenses that...South Dakota
S.B. 140, 2016 S.D. Sess. Laws (S.D. 2016) (amending S.D. Codified Laws § 22-6-1 and enacting a new section).
Texas
S.B. 2, 83rd Leg. Special Sess. (Texas 2013) (enacting Tex. Penal Code Ann. § 12.31, Tex. Code Crim. Proc. Ann. art. 37.071) and S.B. 839, 81st Leg. Sess. (Texas 2009) (enacting Tex. Gov’t Code Ann. § 508.145(b)).
Utah
H.B. 405 (Utah 2016) (amending Laws of Utah §§ 76-3-203.6, -206, -207, -207.5, -207-.7 and enacting § 76-3-209).
Vermont
H. 62, 73rd Sess. (2015) (enacting Vt. Stat. Ann. tit. 13, § 7045)
West Virginia
H.B. 4210, 81 Leg., 2d Sess. (W.Va. 2014) (enacting W. Va. Code §§ 61-11-23, 62-12-13b).
Wyoming
H.B. 23, 62nd Leg., Gen. Sess. (Wyo. 2013) (amending Wyo. Stat. Ann. §§ 6-2-101(b), 6-2-306(d), (e), 6-10-201(b)(ii), 6-10-301(c), 7-13-402(a)).
Miller Mitigation Presentation
A presentation on Miller Mitigation by Beth Cahill of Lang & Kaboski, LLP. (Click the orange title above to view it.)
Amicus Brief filed in State v. Riley
State v. Riley is a Connecticut Supreme Court case addressing whether Miller applies in a discretionary regime.
Miller Applies to Lengthy Term-of-Years Sentences and Discretionary Sentences
In 2015, the Connecticut Supreme Court decided in State v. Riley, 110 A.3d 1205 (Conn. 2015), that Miller’s holding extends to both lengthy term-of-years sentences that are the functional equivalent of life without parole and life-without-parole sentences imposed in a discretionary regime. A trial court may not impose discretionary life without parole (or the functional equivalent of life without parole) without first giving mitigating effect to the defendant’s youth and its attendant circumstances. The record must clearly reflect the court considered these factors before imposing the sentence. The court also noted that there is a presumption against imposing a life-without-parole sentence on a juvenile without first overcoming it with evidence of unusual circumstances.